PEOPLE OR PAPERWORK An Analysis of Influences upon Juvenile Court Personnel

Probation officers and other juvenile court staff complain that paperwork limits the time spent working directly with youth. The alleged effect of paperwork is compared with that of interpersonal influence resulting from time spent talking with youth about their problems. Multiple regression of data from a juvenile court staff indicated that the time spent on paperwork has no independent effect. This group's paperwork complaints are ideological. But interpersonal influences do have considerable impact.     

Patient warnings in court-ordered evaluations of children and families

The rules covering disclosure of information generated by court-ordered clinical evaluations in Massachusetts require that patients be warned that the patient-psychotherapist privilege does not apply to the evaluation interview. The nature of the warning required ("the Lamb warning") is not perfectly clear and is especially uncertain when those being warned are children and families. Comparing the Lamb warning to the Miranda warning offers some insight but is not conclusive. To reach conclusions regarding the type and degree of procedural protections for children required by the Lamb warning, it is necessary to analyze the stakes, interests, and capacities involved for children in juvenile court. This analysis suggests that in most situations a relatively informal procedure is sufficient to provide the required warning. However, there are some exceptional circumstances in which more formal and thorough warnings should be required. These include juvenile transfer hearings and some situations involving child abuse and neglect.     

Juvenile conference committees: An evaluation of the administration of justice at the neighborhood level

The Juvenile/Family Court has significant problems in dealing efficiently and effectively with its caseload. Due to the pressure of “serious” juvenile crime, a large volume of status offense and minor crime cases, although of significant social consequence, are dismissed by the court. The concept of “neighborhood justice” has provided one basis for dealing with such cases.This is a report of a process evaluation of New Jersey's Juvenile Conference Committee (JCC) program, which provides an extensive network of citizen tribunals as an arm of the court. The evaluation was designed to explore both structural and procedural aspects of the JCC with a focus on policy implications. Results show that the JCC is a major diversion mechanism. Questions are raised, however, as to the purpose of intervention in cases of minor delinquency and the adequacy of current JCC procedures in dealing with such cases. The conclusion is reached that the citizens' tribunal is an important mechanism for community development.     

The blurred vision of Lady Justice for minors with mental disorders: Records of the juvenile court in Belgium

Purpose

This study examined (1) the information present in juvenile court records in Belgium (Flanders) and (2) whether there are differences in information between records that mention a mental disorder and those that do not.

Method

The file study sample included 107 court records, and we used a Pearson's chi-square test and a t-test to analyze the information within those records.

Results

Information in juvenile court records varied considerably. This variability was evident when we compared juvenile court records with and without mention of a mental disorder. Significantly more information about school-related problems, the functioning of the minor, and the occurrence of domestic violence was included in records that mentioned a mental disorder compared with records that did not.

Conclusion

The content of the juvenile court records varied, particularly with regard to the mental health status of the minor in question. We suggest guidelines to standardize the information contained in juvenile court records.     

Comparing Sexuality,Aggressiveness, and Antisocial Behavior of Alleged Juvenile Sexual and Violent Offenders,

Sexual delinquency in juveniles is insufficiently explored in regard to the specificity of offender characteristics. The aim is to investigate relevant areas for juvenile sexual offending in a precourt, pretreatment group. Thirty‐two alleged juvenile sexual offenders (ASO) referred to by police were compared with 32 juvenile nonsexual violent offenders (VNO) on standardized measures of aggressiveness and psychopathology, antisocial behavior, substance use problems, and sexuality. Less externalizing disorders and antisocial behavior were found among the ASOs than among the VNOs. The ASO group was sexually less experienced, had less trust in their relationship abilities, fewer victimization experiences, and reported more sexual deviance, while pornography use and obscene calls were reported less often. Few juvenile sexual offenders had severe problems in the investigated areas. Including groups of offenders before court, treatment or incarceration in research appears crucial to understand the full spectrum of sexual deviance in youth and avoid misguidance due to selection factors.     

Sexsomnia – a forensic psychiatric challenge – a case report

In rare penal cases, a defendant makes a claim that he or she was asleep at the time of an alleged crime. This article discusses a case of alleged sexsomnia where a man claimed that he had been asleep during a sexual encounter (rape) with a woman. The question that often arises during an investigation and in court is how complex a behaviour is someone able to perform and still be asleep? To assist the court in answering this question, forensic psychiatric experts may be appointed. But the experts were not present during the act and must therefore consider each case on the basis of the available information and existing research. This paper provides a brief overview of the research regarding sexsomnia. It will also discuss what kind of information is important to elaborate in these cases in order to clarify the premises for the experts’ conclusions to the court.     

JUVENILE COURT INTAKE An Analysis of Discretionary Decision-Making

An increasing amount of pressure has been directed toward juvenile court operations, much of which has focused on the hypothesized abuse of the broad discretionary decision-making power that has traditionally been vested in the court. In this paper, we attempt to examine the extent to which factors not directly associated with the nature of the alleged offense may alter the probability that a juvenile w.11 be referred for a formal hearing in the juvenile court, a step which many analysts feel may have the unintended function of promoting rather than inhibiting subsequent involvement in delinquent behavior. Based on an analysis of 346 cases, our findings show that a number of variables that are not of direct legal relevance do exert a significant influence on the dispositional process, but the magnitude of this influence is not as great as many have been led to expect given the orientation of some explanatory models, particularly those based on the propositions of the labeling school.     

Predicting Outcomes with Juvenile Court Case Histories

This report supplements a prior article in this journal (Rogers and Williams, 1994). Utilizing Ted Palmer's 1991 formulation, we identified a set of indicators relevant to juvenile court decision-making and to policy formulation. Here, through a more stringent statistical technique, we provide additional evidence of the potential that juvenile court histories possess for both theory and practice. We explore case materials gained and maintained by juvenile probation officers as a way of generating outcome predictors for whether youth receive probation or institutionalization. Using discriminant function analysis, we obtain relatively good prediction. Delinquency history and social psychological variables are found to enhance prediction of case outcomes. Contrary to some scholars, we believe the juvenile court is here to stay. Thus, the fundamental issue becomes one of making it a more efficient, effective instrument for reintegrating youths it must serve. As this institution approaches its centennial in 1999, we believe the court must become a focal point of research. This article is intended to further that task. After identifying the three strongest predictive variables (offense after first hearing, alienation, and denial of blame), we employ our seven key indicators as a guide for illustrating their everyday application for juvenile probation officers working with their youthful clientele.     

The Juvenile Drug Court Judge and Lawyer: Four Common Mistakes in Treating Drug Court Adolescents

This article will present information gleaned from anecdotal experience of existing juvenile drug treatment courts regarding several common mistakes often made by those new to the drug court. The mistakes discussed include: 1) Believing the work and role responsibilities in a traditional juvenile court will not change significantly when entering a juvenile drug court; 2) Citing the elimination of drug and alcohol use as a final outcome goal when developing the mission statement for a juvenile drug court; 3) Believing that a juvenile drug court ensures accountability by keeping a close eye on participants and setting immediate consequences for any break in program rules; 4) Using vicarious learning to “teach a lesson”–making an example of an individual participant who has broken program rules in front of the large group. The goal of this article is not only to raise caution to these pitfalls, but also to help incoming judges and lawyers become aware of the changes that working in a juvenile drug court will demand.     

Psychosocial concepts in juvenile law

This study was designed to clarify the types of information about juveniles and their families that are relevant for three types of juvenile court decisions: (a) the pretrial detention of juveniles; (b) their transfer for trial in criminal courts: and (c) disposition decisions after delinquency adjudication. Predominant legal standards for these decisions are described, information relevance for the decisions is defined, and why past studies have failed to clarify the information needs of juvenile court decision makers is explained. Results of a study involving a national sample of juvenile court personnel include an empirically derived domain of psychosocial and behavioral characteristics of juveniles and their families relevant for courts' interpretations of controlling legal standards; factor analysis of the domain, describing dimensions of the domain of information about juveniles and families; and an examination of the relation of these information categories to each legal standard controlling the decision areas in question. The interpretation of results may facilitate decision making by juvenile courts, evaluations by mental health professionals who assist juvenile courts, and further research by social scientists who study discretionary juvenile court decisions.This research was supported by grant No. MH-35090 from the Center for Studies of Antisocial and Violent Behavior, National Institute of Mental Health, DHHS. Portions of the study were conducted in collaboration with the National Juvenile Law Center, Inc. of St. Louis. The authors wish to acknowledge Martha Bellew-Smith, Marcia Conlin, and Robert Rust, who contributed substantially to the conduct of the study. Others who participated at various stages are Steve Bellus and Sandra Seigel     

Prosecuting Juveniles as Adults

In Minnesota, the 1980 legislature statutorily defined a class of juvenile offenders presumed on the basis of age, alleged offense, and record of prior felony offenses to be unfit for treatment in the juvenile court. In this article we evaluate the effect of Minnesota's revised waiver statute by comparing cases in which waiver proceedings were initiated and in which transfer occurred for two time periods, before and after adoption of the legislatively defined presumptive criteria. Our findings suggest that the objective criteria adopted by the Minnesota legislature are not, in themselves, an adequate means for selecting juveniles for transfer to adult court. The criteria identify many juveniles whose records on close examination do not appear to be very serious and fail to identify many juveniles whose records are characterized by violent, frequent, and persistent delinquent activity.     

The violence of silence: some reflections on access to information, public participation in decision-making, and access to justice in matters concerning the environment

The proposition put forth in this paper is that whether—and the extent to which—harm or potential harm to the environment (its natural resources, living beings, and their ecosystems) is identified, resisted, mitigated, or prevented is linked to the nature and scope of public access to information, participation in governmental decision-making, and access to justice—which are often referred to as “environmental due process” or “procedural environmental rights.” Using examples in the United States of attacks on law school clinics and denial of standing in court, this paper argues that restrictions on public access to information, participation in decision-making, and access to justice create legacies and “cultures of silence” that reduce the likelihood that future generations will be willing and able to contest environmental harm.     

An Evaluation of Teen Court as a Juvenile Crime Diversion Program

Theories of procedural justice support the American legal system's search for a fair and effective means of diverting offenders from the juvenile court system. Teen Court programs, in which juvenile offenders are tried and sentenced by a jury of peers, are one of the latest developments in attempts to positively influence offenders and direct them free of crime. The present research found that participation in Teen Court increased offenders' legal knowledge and enhanced their attitudes toward some authority figures (i.e., the judge) and themselves to a greater extent than non‐offending juveniles. In addition, only 12.6 percent of juvenile offenders re‐offended within five months of their initial Teen Court involvement. Improved attitudes toward authority and self were associated with a lower incidence of recidivism. Overall, these results contribute to the growing literature indicating that Teen Court can be an effective juvenile crime diversion program. This article also discusses methodological issues for future program evaluations.     

Clinical evaluation of juvenile delinquents: who gets court referred?

This study examines which alleged delinquents in a large urban juvenile court are selected for referral to the court's psychiatric clinic. A number of demographic factors, probation officer impressions, index charges, and past delinquency record variables were examined for all minor delinquency cases referred in a six-month period and for a random selection of nonreferred cases. In general, referral was associated with lower socioeconomic status (SES), and with a variety of probation impressions of child and family dysfunction. Little relation to index charge or past record was found. The authors interpret these results as showing that probation referrals appear to be made more on the basis of high risk than on the basis of favorable prognosis for treatment.     

An At‐Risk Profile of Probation Supervised Youthful Offenders in a Rural,Midwest County: Significant Gender and Race Differences

There have been multiple risk factors identified that lead to youth delinquent behaviors and activities. These risks are family, school, peer, disability, and neighborhood related, though the studies to date have primarily focused on larger urban juvenile court jurisdictions. This exploratory study of one rural juvenile court (in Ashtabula County, Ohio) furthers these risk factor investigations through the evaluation of 91 randomly selected, adjudicated delinquent youth (supervised in 2008 and 2009). Data on 23 risk factors was collected, with further analysis of significant gender and race differences. Key results were that a majority of youth experienced poverty and lived in a one‐parent family; 40% had a mental health or substance abuse problem; 25% were in need of special education disability services; males were much more likely to have school‐related difficulties and to commit felony offenses; females had significantly more mental health and substance abuse problems; and minority youth successfully completed probation more often.     

Juvenile Court Clinical Services: A National Description

There have been few studies of the manner in which juvenile courts obtain clinical evaluations and consultation by juvenile court clinicians in order to identify and respond to youths with mental health problems. This study involved a telephone survey of professionals associated with juvenile court clinic (JCC) services in 87 of the largest juvenile court jurisdictions nationwide, providing data on their professional staff, functions, procedures, organizational and financial structures, and methods for providing evaluations to juvenile courts. We identified three models of JCC service delivery systems. Differences between the JCC service models offer hypotheses pertaining to potential differences in efficiency and quality of services and service delivery.     

Role of voice in the legal process*

As communities face unrest and protest because of perceived racial bias and decreased trust and confidence in the criminal justice system, it is critical to explore mechanisms that foster institutional legitimacy. Voice is a central element in the procedural justice framework because it is anticipated to promote process control as well as a shared understanding between institutions and communities. As a concept, however, voice is undertheorized. Measures of voice used in legitimacy research may result in oversimplification of the concept, not fully capturing the struggles disadvantaged people face in trying to exercise influence in the court system. Through the use of rich data from qualitative interviews with youth and families involved in the juvenile justice system and in‐depth observations of juvenile court events, we explore what voice is, the mechanisms through which people try to assert voice, and how voice matters in the legal process. Respondents sought voice for many reasons, including to validate their experiences, to affirm their membership in a community, and to assert concerns about perceived police misconduct. Contrary to traditional conceptualizations of voice as a static event (e.g., having voice or not having voice), voice was a process of negotiating dialogue between court officials and court participants throughout the legal process.     

Analytic methods for examining race and ethnic disparity in the juvenile courts

Prior studies of juvenile court decision making and racial disparity are often criticized for their lack of methodological rigor. These studies are criticized for focusing their analyses on separate decision-making stages and not taking into account issues that are related to sample selection. This research attempted to address these issues through an analysis of juvenile court case records from the state of Hawaii. Different limited dependent variable models were used to estimate ethnic disparity in juvenile court outcomes. Comparisons of models according to the Bayesian Information Criteria (BICs) are used to assess the overall fit of these models. The findings indicate few substantive differences across models and a general leniency of the court in favor of White youth. The findings do reveal that there are differences in the accuracy with which these models predicted juvenile court outcomes. The usefulness of this method of model comparison for disparity research is discussed.     

The Juvenile Justice Assessment Instrument

Abstract This article presents the development of a new assessment instrument for use with juvenile delinquents: The Juvenile Justice Assessment Instrument (JJAI). The term “juvenile delinquency” covers a multitude of antisocial behaviors engaged in by adolescents. Research indicates that certain intrinsic vulnerabilities may combine with environmental stressors to engender maladaptive behaviors. Unfortunately, these potentially treatable vulnerabilities often remain unrecognized in the delinquent population. Because of the sheer numbers of children entering the juvenile justice system each year, it is impossible to ensure that each child will receive a full evaluation from a trained clinician. The JJAI offers those who work with juvenile delinquents an economical, yet sophisticated, assessment tool for evaluating youngsters and recommending appropriate treatment and disposition. This paper also presents the results of two field trials with the JJAI. In a juvenile justice setting, data elicited by the JJAI was compared to data gathered by the court. In a residential treatment setting, data elicited by the JJAI was compared with information gathered by staff at the treatment facility. A discussion of the obstacles faced by those who interview delinquents, and strategies within the JJAI to overcome them, are discussed.     

Juvenile Court Variations: Procedural and Processing Differences in a Midwestern State

This study examined whether location and type of juvenile court impacted processing for juveniles in a Midwestern state. 1 For the analysis, the author used qualitative data. This article was built on the opinions and observations of those who work in the juvenile justice system on a daily basis. The author observed juvenile courts and interviewed judges, prosecutors, and defense attorneys. The information contained herein verifies the differences between rural and urban juvenile justice practice and procedure. The results of this study also revealed that processing varies across jurisdictions and type of court in the juvenile justice system.